UPHAAR CINEMA CASE STUDY PPT

This has to be avoided at all costs. The recent judgment on Sanjay Dutt has clearly demonstrated the sanctity of the law inspite of a mountain of pressure by the media and his numerous fans. The documents referred by the Defence Counsel clearly demonstrate that it was Mr. It was also argued that the prosecution has deliberately withheld the filing of documents of sale transaction of shares and has only placed the cheque on record in order to falsely implicate Mr. The northern bound smoke encountered a gate which was adjacent to a staircase leading to the cinema auditorium on the first floor. Published by Avice Gilmore Modified over 3 years ago. Around , the Supreme Court upheld their conviction but considering their advanced age and the period already spent by them in prison, it decided not to send them back to jail and rather asked the duo to pay a fine of Rs 30 crore each in lieu of a jail term. Gopal Ansal resigned from the board of directors of the company that owns Uphaar Cinema in and they were not involved in the cinema business.

This is, however, one facet of the coin. A hostile atmosphere is bound to interfere in an unbiased approach as well as a decision. The prosecution continued to argue that Ansal Brothers were involved in day to day running of the theatre whereas through the documentary and oral evidence, it has been demonstrated by the defence that they were not on the Board since and the Company was being run by Board of Professionals and Whole Time Director of the Company was Mr. Therefore, the cinema owner was protected under section 78 and 79 of the Indian Penal Code which clearly contemplated that if an act is done pursuant to some order of the Court or of the authority no offence can be said to have been committed. He further demonstrated that the minutes of meeting were not proved by the prosecution and as such they can not be read against Mr. To use this website, you must agree to our Privacy Policy , including cookie policy. Feb 09,

The apex court further stated that Ansals were more concerned about making money than ensuring safety of cinema goers. Human stampedes and crushes. This couple never quits: Courts have to remain unaffected and impartial and treat offenders equal before the law to a pre trial publicity which at times reflects its hostility and prejudice towards such an accused.

  CHIDIYA GHAR EPISODE 590

Later, I got a phone call from a friend about the fire. What happens outside the court rooms when the Court is busy in its process of adjudication is indeed in irrelevant and unless a proper cushion is provided to keep the proceedings within the Court room dissociated from the heat generated outside the Court room either through the News Media or through flutter in the public mind, the cause of justice is bound to suffer.

It was a tragic accident! Chaudhary himself became unconscious by inhaling the smoke and was admitted to the AIIMS by the Police where he received the treatment. Very uplifting Business Line8 May Despite being objected to by the counsels for the accused the Public Prosecutor continued to refer to the documents and argued the case on facts. The guilt of the accused has to be adjudged not by the fact that a vast number of people believe him to be guilty but whether his guilt has been established by the evidence brought on record.

The Defence Counsel demonstrated from the record that in order to secure electricity supply for Uphaar Cinema, the Uphaar management was compelled to provide space to DESU for installation of its sub-station in the Cinema premises for catering to the need of electricity to the surrounding Green Park area.

Afghanistan beat Ireland by 32 runs.

Facts on Uphaar Tragedy | The truth about the Incident

Please choose one of the options All emergency lights, PA systems and ccase safety measures were in full working order. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources.

If an accused is entitled to any legitimate benefit during trial, it is the duty of the Public Prosecutor to make it available to the accused even if the defense counsel has overlooked it. Let us not continue to create suffering for the innocents.

He further demonstrated that Mr. Justice delayed, is justice denied? In the case titled Kali Ram Vs. Malhotra was its Dy. The apex court, however, allowed Ansal to stay abroad for medical treatment after he gave an assurance that he will return on 11 April.

Green Park, DelhiIndia. Sushil Ansal or Mr. In this way the increase of seats and closure of gangway by the Cinema owner did not constitute any offence. stuyd

Uphaar cinema tragedy: Trial by fire comes to end after two decades, here’s all you need to know

If these deviations contributed anything against the safety of the patrons, the statutory authorities like Fire, PWD, Electrical Inspector, Licensing, etc. Puri, Whole Time Director on the day of incident. Media has kphaar to be a watchdog of the society in the real sense.

  ATASHI WA JUICE MOVIE ONLINE

Kolkata Police chief Rajeev Kumar grilled for 11 hrs in connection with chit fund scam cases, to face CBI again tomorrow. Malhotra were communicated as nominee to the licensing authority on It seems that the prime target of the prosecuting agency was to malign icnema Ansals name and nothing else.

Inside the auditorium and balcony there was complete pandemonium. In any case, the reiteration of the documents contents by the prosecution — have all been cienma refuted by way of evidences and proofs by defense lawyers in the past weeks. Malhotra were nominated under the Cinematograph Act, to look after the day to day affairs of Cinema. On the morning of the incident, another repair had caused loose connections which led to sparks that brought the whole hall down.

It is the constitutional right of every Indian citizen to be tried by czse adhering to the Indian Penal Code which lay down specifically on what basis a person can be deemed as guilty or innocent.

Chopra further argued that a Public Prosecutor is a part of judicial system and an officer of the Court and must act independently in the interest of the justice. Chopra further argued that such an attitude of the Public Prosecutor is not only violative of the Principle of Natural Justice but also of the fundamental rights as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Gopal Ansal as the direct, proximate and immediate cause of death was the fire in the DVB transformer which was incomplete control and finema of DVB authorities. Share holding in the Company It was argued by the Defence Counsel that share holders are neither the owners of the company nor they are entitled uphaaar its assets.